[Jersey Republican Biker Chick]

"There is no dissent, no group of Justices who say this should have been considered, and giving their reasons. The lack of a dissent is, in my experience with the Court, a green light for all courts at the federal and state level, to throw out all remaining Obama-citizenship cases, without factual hearings."

I do not believe a dissent is written for an application for a writ of certiorari. All they did was decide not to review the trial court record.

[Congressman Billybob]

To the contrary, when the minority of Justices feel strongly about an issue, they DO file dissents. For decades in obscenity cases, a four-Justice minority would file sometimes lengthy dissents, ending with the correct point that they could have forced the Court to hear the case. (Only four Justices need to vote yes to grant certiorari so the Court takes up a particular case.)

John / Billybob

[Ex-Democrat Dean]

I do not believe a dissent is written for an application for a writ of certiorari.
*********************************

In fact, such a dissent is quite unusual.

[Sibre Fan]

To see an example where a justice dissents from the full court’s ruling on a case, see today’s orderlist — http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/orders/courtorders/120808zor.pdf — at
page 8: 08-6644 GALLARDO, GARRY D. V. TACKITT, JOE D., ET AL. (Stevens dissented from order)

page 9: 08-7060 SENATOR, BRUCE V. USCA 9.

This indicates that the SCOTUS decision on Donofrio’s application was unanimous.